Search Results

Search found 362 results on 15 pages for 'signatures'.

Page 7/15 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Update information outdated

    - by Achim Krause
    I have a warning triangle that my update information is outdated, the last update was 12 days ago. I use Ubuntu 11.10. A run of sudo apt-get update produces the following output: Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric InRelease Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric InRelease Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates InRelease Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports InRelease Ign http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security InRelease Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com oneiric InRelease Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric Release.gpg Get:1 http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric Release.gpg [198 B] Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security Release.gpg Get:2 http://extras.ubuntu.com oneiric Release.gpg [72 B] Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric Release Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates Release.gpg Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security Release Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com oneiric Release Err http://extras.ubuntu.com oneiric Release Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric/main Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports Release.gpg Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/main Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric/main i386 Packages Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric/main TranslationIndex Ign http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric InRelease Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/restricted Sources Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/universe Sources Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/multiverse Sources Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/main i386 Packages Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/universe i386 Packages Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/multiverse i386 Packages Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/main TranslationIndex Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/multiverse TranslationIndex Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/restricted TranslationIndex Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/universe TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric Release Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates Release Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric Release Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/main Translation-en Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/multiverse Translation-en Hit http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric Release.gpg Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/restricted Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports Release Hit http://security.ubuntu.com oneiric-security/universe Translation-en Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/main Sources/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/restricted Sources/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/universe Sources/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/multiverse Sources/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/main i386 Packages/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/restricted i386 Packages/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/universe i386 Packages/DiffIndex Ign http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/multiverse i386 Packages/DiffIndex Hit http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric Release Get:3 http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/main TranslationIndex [3,289 B] Get:4 http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/multiverse TranslationIndex [2,265 B] Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/restricted TranslationIndex Get:5 http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/universe TranslationIndex [2,640 B] Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/universe i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/multiverse i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/main TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/multiverse TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/restricted TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/universe TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/main Sources Hit http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric/main i386 Packages Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net oneiric/main Translation-en Ign http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric/main TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/restricted Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/universe Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/multiverse Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/main i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/universe i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/multiverse i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/main TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/multiverse TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/restricted TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/universe TranslationIndex Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/main Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/restricted Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/universe Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/multiverse Sources Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/main i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/universe i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/multiverse i386 Packages Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric/restricted Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/main Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/multiverse Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/restricted Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/universe Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/main Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/multiverse Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/restricted Translation-en Hit http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-backports/universe Translation-en Err http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/main Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] Err http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/restricted Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] Err http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/universe Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] Err http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/multiverse Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] Err http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric-updates/main i386 Packages 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] Ign http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric/main Translation-en_US Ign http://linux.dropbox.com oneiric/main Translation-en Fetched 273 B in 2s (91 B/s) Reading package lists... Done W: A error occurred during the signature verification. The repository is not updated and the previous index files will be used. GPG error: http://extras.ubuntu.com oneiric Release: The following signatures were invalid: BADSIG 16126D3A3E5C1192 Ubuntu Extras Archive Automatic Signing Key <[email protected]> W: GPG error: http://de.archive.ubuntu.com oneiric Release: The following signatures were invalid: BADSIG 40976EAF437D05B5 Ubuntu Archive Automatic Signing Key <[email protected]> W: Failed to fetch http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric/Release W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric/main/i18n/Index No Hash entry in Release file /var/lib/apt/lists/partial/de.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_oneiric_main_i18n_Index W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric/multiverse/i18n/Index No Hash entry in Release file /var/lib/apt/lists/partial/de.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_oneiric_multiverse_i18n_Index W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric/universe/i18n/Index No Hash entry in Release file /var/lib/apt/lists/partial/de.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_oneiric_universe_i18n_Index W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric-updates/main/source/Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric-updates/restricted/source/Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric-updates/universe/source/Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric-updates/multiverse/source/Sources 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] W: Failed to fetch http://de.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/oneiric-updates/main/binary-i386/Packages 416 Requested Range Not Satisfiable [IP: 141.30.13.30 80] W: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead. There are some questions with similar problems, but no one seems to get these "Range Not Satisfiable" errors. I do not use a proxy, and the network configuration should not have changed since it worked the last time.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Code for type casting Generic Types 'generically' in C#

    - by Rick Strahl
    C# is a strongly typed language and while that's a fundamental feature of the language there are more and more situations where dynamic types make a lot of sense. I've written quite a bit about how I use dynamic for creating new type extensions: Dynamic Types and DynamicObject References in C# Creating a dynamic, extensible C# Expando Object Creating a dynamic DataReader for dynamic Property Access Today I want to point out an example of a much simpler usage for dynamic that I use occasionally to get around potential static typing issues in C# code especially those concerning generic types. TypeCasting Generics Generic types have been around since .NET 2.0 I've run into a number of situations in the past - especially with generic types that don't implement specific interfaces that can be cast to - where I've been unable to properly cast an object when it's passed to a method or assigned to a property. Granted often this can be a sign of bad design, but in at least some situations the code that needs to be integrated is not under my control so I have to make due with what's available or the parent object is too complex or intermingled to be easily refactored to a new usage scenario. Here's an example that I ran into in my own RazorHosting library - so I have really no excuse, but I also don't see another clean way around it in this case. A Generic Example Imagine I've implemented a generic type like this: public class RazorEngine<TBaseTemplateType> where TBaseTemplateType : RazorTemplateBase, new() You can now happily instantiate new generic versions of this type with custom template bases or even a non-generic version which is implemented like this: public class RazorEngine : RazorEngine<RazorTemplateBase> { public RazorEngine() : base() { } } To instantiate one: var engine = new RazorEngine<MyCustomRazorTemplate>(); Now imagine that the template class receives a reference to the engine when it's instantiated. This code is fired as part of the Engine pipeline when it gets ready to execute the template. It instantiates the template and assigns itself to the template: var template = new TBaseTemplateType() { Engine = this } The problem here is that possibly many variations of RazorEngine<T> can be passed. I can have RazorTemplateBase, RazorFolderHostTemplateBase, CustomRazorTemplateBase etc. as generic parameters and the Engine property has to reflect that somehow. So, how would I cast that? My first inclination was to use an interface on the engine class and then cast to the interface.  Generally that works, but unfortunately here the engine class is generic and has a few members that require the template type in the member signatures. So while I certainly can implement an interface: public interface IRazorEngine<TBaseTemplateType> it doesn't really help for passing this generically templated object to the template class - I still can't cast it if multiple differently typed versions of the generic type could be passed. I have the exact same issue in that I can't specify a 'generic' generic parameter, since there's no underlying base type that's common. In light of this I decided on using object and the following syntax for the property (and the same would be true for a method parameter): public class RazorTemplateBase :MarshalByRefObject,IDisposable { public object Engine {get;set; } } Now because the Engine property is a non-typed object, when I need to do something with this value, I still have no way to cast it explicitly. What I really would need is: public RazorEngine<> Engine { get; set; } but that's not possible. Dynamic to the Rescue Luckily with the dynamic type this sort of thing can be mitigated fairly easily. For example here's a method that uses the Engine property and uses the well known class interface by simply casting the plain object reference to dynamic and then firing away on the properties and methods of the base template class that are common to all templates:/// <summary> /// Allows rendering a dynamic template from a string template /// passing in a model. This is like rendering a partial /// but providing the input as a /// </summary> public virtual string RenderTemplate(string template,object model) { if (template == null) return string.Empty; // if there's no template markup if(!template.Contains("@")) return template; // use dynamic to get around generic type casting dynamic engine = Engine; string result = engine.RenderTemplate(template, model); if (result == null) throw new ApplicationException("RenderTemplate failed: " + engine.ErrorMessage); return result; } Prior to .NET 4.0  I would have had to use Reflection for this sort of thing which would have a been a heck of a lot more verbose, but dynamic makes this so much easier and cleaner and in this case at least the overhead is negliable since it's a single dynamic operation on an otherwise very complex operation call. Dynamic as  a Bailout Sometimes this sort of thing often reeks of a design flaw, and I agree that in hindsight this could have been designed differently. But as is often the case this particular scenario wasn't planned for originally and removing the generic signatures from the base type would break a ton of other code in the framework. Given the existing fairly complex engine design, refactoring an interface to remove generic types just to make this particular code work would have been overkill. Instead dynamic provides a nice and simple and relatively clean solution. Now if there were many other places where this occurs I would probably consider reworking the code to make this cleaner but given this isolated instance and relatively low profile operation use of dynamic seems a valid choice for me. This solution really works anywhere where you might end up with an inheritance structure that doesn't have a common base or interface that is sufficient. In the example above I know what I'm getting but there's no common base type that I can cast to. All that said, it's a good idea to think about use of dynamic before you rush in. In many situations there are alternatives that can still work with static typing. Dynamic definitely has some overhead compared to direct static access of objects, so if possible we should definitely stick to static typing. In the example above the application already uses dynamics extensively for dynamic page page templating and passing models around so introducing dynamics here has very little additional overhead. The operation itself also fires of a fairly resource heavy operation where the overhead of a couple of dynamic member accesses are not a performance issue. So, what's your experience with dynamic as a bailout mechanism? © Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in CSharp   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Self-signed certificates for a known community

    - by costlow
    Recently announced changes scheduled for Java 7 update 51 (January 2014) have established that the default security slider will require code signatures and the Permissions Manifest attribute. Code signatures are a common practice recommended in the industry because they help determine that the code your computer will run is the same code that the publisher created. This post is written to help users that need to use self-signed certificates without involving a public Certificate Authority. The role of self-signed certificates within a known community You may still use self-signed certificates within a known community. The difference between self-signed and purchased-from-CA is that your users must import your self-signed certificate to indicate that it is valid, whereas Certificate Authorities are already trusted by default. This works for known communities where people will trust that my certificate is mine, but does not scale widely where I cannot actually contact or know the systems that will need to trust my certificate. Public Certificate Authorities are widely trusted already because they abide by many different requirements and frequent checks. An example would be students in a university class sharing their public certificates on a mailing list or web page, employees publishing on the intranet, or a system administrator rolling certificates out to end-users. Managed machines help this because you can automate the rollout, but they are not required -- the major point simply that people will trust and import your certificate. How to distribute self-signed certificates for a known community There are several steps required to distribute a self-signed certificate to users so that they will properly trust it. These steps are: Creating a public/private key pair for signing. Exporting your public certificate for others Importing your certificate onto machines that should trust you Verify work on a different machine Creating a public/private key pair for signing Having a public/private key pair will give you the ability both to sign items yourself and issue a Certificate Signing Request (CSR) to a certificate authority. Create your public/private key pair by following the instructions for creating key pairs.Every Certificate Authority that I looked at provided similar instructions, but for the sake of cohesiveness I will include the commands that I used here: Generate the key pair.keytool -genkeypair -alias erikcostlow -keyalg EC -keysize 571 -validity 730 -keystore javakeystore_keepsecret.jks Provide a good password for this file. The alias "erikcostlow" is my name and therefore easy to remember. Substitute your name of something like "mykey." The sigalg of EC (Elliptical Curve) and keysize of 571 will give your key a good strong lifetime. All keys are set to expire. Two years or 730 days is a reasonable compromise between not-long-enough and too-long. Most public Certificate Authorities will sign something for one to five years. You will be placing your keys in javakeystore_keepsecret.jks -- this file will contain private keys and therefore should not be shared. If someone else gets these private keys, they can impersonate your signature. Please be cautious about automated cloud backup systems and private key stores. Answer all the questions. It is important to provide good answers because you will stick with them for the "-validity" days that you specified above.What is your first and last name?  [Unknown]:  First LastWhat is the name of your organizational unit?  [Unknown]:  Line of BusinessWhat is the name of your organization?  [Unknown]:  MyCompanyWhat is the name of your City or Locality?  [Unknown]:  City NameWhat is the name of your State or Province?  [Unknown]:  CAWhat is the two-letter country code for this unit?  [Unknown]:  USIs CN=First Last, OU=Line of Business, O=MyCompany, L=City, ST=CA, C=US correct?  [no]:  yesEnter key password for <erikcostlow>        (RETURN if same as keystore password): Verify your work:keytool -list -keystore javakeystore_keepsecret.jksYou should see your new key pair. Exporting your public certificate for others Public Key Infrastructure relies on two simple concepts: the public key may be made public and the private key must be private. By exporting your public certificate, you are able to share it with others who can then import the certificate to trust you. keytool -exportcert -keystore javakeystore_keepsecret.jks -alias erikcostlow -file erikcostlow.cer To verify this, you can open the .cer file by double-clicking it on most operating systems. It should show the information that you entered during the creation prompts. This is the file that you will share with others. They will use this certificate to prove that artifacts signed by this certificate came from you. If you do not manage machines directly, place the certificate file on an area that people within the known community should trust, such as an intranet page. Import the certificate onto machines that should trust you In order to trust the certificate, people within your known network must import your certificate into their keystores. The first step is to verify that the certificate is actually yours, which can be done through any band: email, phone, in-person, etc. Known networks can usually do this Determine the right keystore: For an individual user looking to trust another, the correct file is within that user’s directory.e.g. USER_HOME\AppData\LocalLow\Sun\Java\Deployment\security\trusted.certs For system-wide installations, Java’s Certificate Authorities are in JAVA_HOMEe.g. C:\Program Files\Java\jre8\lib\security\cacerts File paths for Mac and Linux are included in the link above. Follow the instructions to import the certificate into the keystore. keytool -importcert -keystore THEKEYSTOREFROMABOVE -alias erikcostlow -file erikcostlow.cer In this case, I am still using my name for the alias because it’s easy for me to remember. You may also use an alias of your company name. Scaling distribution of the import The easiest way to apply your certificate across many machines is to just push the .certs or cacerts file onto them. When doing this, watch out for any changes that people would have made to this file on their machines. Trusted.certs: When publishing into user directories, your file will overwrite any keys that the user has added since last update. CACerts: It is best to re-run the import command with each installation rather than just overwriting the file. If you just keep the same cacerts file between upgrades, you will overwrite any CAs that have been added or removed. By re-importing, you stay up to date with changes. Verify work on a different machine Verification is a way of checking on the client machine to ensure that it properly trusts signed artifacts after you have added your signing certificate. Many people have started using deployment rule sets. You can validate the deployment rule set by: Create and sign the deployment rule set on the computer that holds the private key. Copy the deployment rule set on to the different machine where you have imported the signing certificate. Verify that the Java Control Panel’s security tab shows your deployment rule set. Verifying an individual JAR file or multiple JAR files You can test a certificate chain by using the jarsigner command. jarsigner -verify filename.jar If the output does not say "jar verified" then run the following command to see why: jarsigner -verify -verbose -certs filename.jar Check the output for the term “CertPath not validated.”

    Read the article

  • Unlocking Productivity

    - by Michael Snow
    Unlocking Productivity in Life Sciences with Consolidated Content Management by Joe Golemba, Vice President, Product Management, Oracle WebCenter As life sciences organizations look to become more operationally efficient, the ability to effectively leverage information is a competitive advantage. Whether data mining at the drug discovery phase or prepping the sales team before a product launch, content management can play a key role in developing, organizing, and disseminating vital information. The goal of content management is relatively straightforward: put the information that people need where they can find it. A number of issues can complicate this; information sits in many different systems, each of those systems has its own security, and the information in those systems exists in many different formats. Identifying and extracting pertinent information from mountains of farflung data is no simple job, but the alternative—wasted effort or even regulatory compliance issues—is worse. An integrated information architecture can enable health sciences organizations to make better decisions, accelerate clinical operations, and be more competitive. Unstructured data matters Often when we think of drug development data, we think of structured data that fits neatly into one or more research databases. But structured data is often directly supported by unstructured data such as experimental protocols, reaction conditions, lot numbers, run times, analyses, and research notes. As life sciences companies seek integrated views of data, they are typically finding diverse islands of data that seemingly have no relationship to other data in the organization. Information like sales reports or call center reports can be locked into siloed systems, and unavailable to the discovery process. Additionally, in the increasingly networked clinical environment, Web pages, instant messages, videos, scientific imaging, sales and marketing data, collaborative workspaces, and predictive modeling data are likely to be present within an organization, and each source potentially possesses information that can help to better inform specific efforts. Historically, content management solutions that had 21CFR Part 11 capabilities—electronic records and signatures—were focused mainly on content-enabling manufacturing-related processes. Today, life sciences companies have many standalone repositories, requiring different skills, service level agreements, and vendor support costs to manage them. With the amount of content doubling every three to six months, companies have recognized the need to manage unstructured content from the beginning, in order to increase employee productivity and operational efficiency. Using scalable and secure enterprise content management (ECM) solutions, organizations can better manage their unstructured content. These solutions can also be integrated with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems or research systems, making content available immediately, in the context of the application and within the flow of the employee’s typical business activity. Administrative safeguards—such as content de-duplication—can also be applied within ECM systems, so documents are never recreated, eliminating redundant efforts, ensuring one source of truth, and maintaining content standards in the organization. Putting it in context Consolidating structured and unstructured information in a single system can greatly simplify access to relevant information when it is needed through contextual search. Using contextual filters, results can include therapeutic area, position in the value chain, semantic commonalities, technology-specific factors, specific researchers involved, or potential business impact. The use of taxonomies is essential to organizing information and enabling contextual searches. Taxonomy solutions are composed of a hierarchical tree that defines the relationship between different life science terms. When overlaid with additional indexing related to research and/or business processes, it becomes possible to effectively narrow down the amount of data that is returned during searches, as well as prioritize results based on specific criteria and/or prior search history. Thus, search results are more accurate and relevant to an employee’s day-to-day work. For example, a search for the word "tissue" by a lab researcher would return significantly different results than a search for the same word performed by someone in procurement. Of course, diverse data repositories, combined with the immense amounts of data present in an organization, necessitate that the data elements be regularly indexed and cached beforehand to enable reasonable search response times. In its simplest form, indexing of a single, consolidated data warehouse can be expected to be a relatively straightforward effort. However, organizations require the ability to index multiple data repositories, enabling a single search to reference multiple data sources and provide an integrated results listing. Security and compliance Beyond yielding efficiencies and supporting new insight, an enterprise search environment can support important security considerations as well as compliance initiatives. For example, the systems enable organizations to retain the relevance and the security of the indexed systems, so users can only see the results to which they are granted access. This is especially important as life sciences companies are working in an increasingly networked environment and need to provide secure, role-based access to information across multiple partners. Although not officially required by the 21 CFR Part 11 regulation, the U.S. Food and Drug Administraiton has begun to extend the type of content considered when performing relevant audits and discoveries. Having an ECM infrastructure that provides centralized management of all content enterprise-wide—with the ability to consistently apply records and retention policies along with the appropriate controls, validations, audit trails, and electronic signatures—is becoming increasingly critical for life sciences companies. Making the move Creating an enterprise-wide ECM environment requires moving large amounts of content into a single enterprise repository, a daunting and risk-laden initiative. The first key is to focus on data taxonomy, allowing content to be mapped across systems. The second is to take advantage new tools which can dramatically speed and reduce the cost of the data migration process through automation. Additional content need not be frozen while it is migrated, enabling productivity throughout the process. The ability to effectively leverage information into success has been gaining importance in the life sciences industry for years. The rapid adoption of enterprise content management, both in operational processes as well as in scientific management, are clear indicators that the companies are looking to use all available data to be better informed, improve decision making, minimize risk, and increase time to market, to maintain profitability and be more competitive. As more and more varieties and sources of information are brought under the strategic management umbrella, the ability to divine knowledge from the vast pool of information is increasingly difficult. Simple search engines and basic content management are increasingly unable to effectively extract the right information from the mountains of data available. By bringing these tools into context and integrating them with business processes and applications, we can effectively focus on the right decisions that make our organizations more profitable. More Information Oracle will be exhibiting at DIA 2012 in Philadelphia on June 25-27. Stop by our booth Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} (#2825) to learn more about the advantages of a centralized ECM strategy and see the Oracle WebCenter Content solution, our 21 CFR Part 11 compliant content management platform.

    Read the article

  • Uninstall mysql completely windows 7

    - by cestmoimarin
    Greetings, I understand that this questions has been asked twice. However the answer is not there. I've removed all mysql in registry via regedit that I could find. I made programdata folder visible, deleted mysql folder that's there. Windows 7 doesn't have a very good 'grep' equivalent that I could use. I tried using powershell to find any hidden files but it requires digital signatures which I do not know how to create. Besides windows restore, is there any other way I can force my old 'invisible' mysql 5.1.40 to disappear? I want to try and install mysql via other ways, I'm not sure how to use cmake though to compile the code.

    Read the article

  • Duplicity Full Backup Lifetime and Efficiency

    - by Tim Lytle
    I'm trying to work up a backup strategy for some clients, and am leaning towards duplicity for remote backup (already use rdiff-backup for internal/on location backups). Is it reasonable to want a full backup every so often? Since duplicity increments forward, each incremental backup is relying on the previous increment, and all are relying heavily on the last full backup. Should that become corrupt, bad things happen. A related question: Does Duplicity test the incremental backups for consistency? Assuming I do want a full backup every so often, how efficiently does duplicity create that full backup? Can/does it check file signatures and copy unchanged data from previous full backups/increments? Basically creating a new 'full' archive transferring new/changed data and merging existing unchanged data? Right now my concern is that running a full backup is needed, but the consistent large bandwidth use of full backups will make this unreasonable for some clients.

    Read the article

  • Debian Unstable + Postfix 2.6.5 + dkim-filter 2.8.2 issue

    - by kura
    I have Postfix installed on Debian Unstable, as the title states, the system is completely up-to-date, I have tried to get DKIM signatures working on outgoing mail using dkim-filter 2.8.2. I couldn't use the default Debian way of doing things with sockets, instead I used the Ubuntu way: SOCKET="inet:12345@localhost"` I have the following in my postfix/main.cf milter_default_action = accept milter_protocol = 6 smtpd_milters = inet:localhost:12345 non_smtpd_milters = inet:localhost:12345 All is fine except I get the following message I start DKIM in mail.log: dkim-filter[22029]: can't configure DKIM library; continuing And when it tries to sign mails I get the following error: postfix/cleanup[22042]: warning: milter inet:localhost:12345: can't read SMFIC_EOH reply packet header: Success And then dkim-filter daemon stops. I've looked through Google but found no actual way to fix this that works for me. I have this working fine on an Ubuntu server but would love to get it working on Debian too.

    Read the article

  • How to fix error 1330 (invalid digital signature) when installing "The Rosetta Stone"

    - by victoriah
    I bought an older version of this software from a friend and the Rosetta Stone support hasn't been of much use. When installing, at the end of the process I get an error from the installer that says something along the lines of: Error 1330. A file that is required cannot be installed because the cabinet file [file.cab] has an invalid digital signature. This isn't the first time I've had such an error, some time ago I was unable to install a game I bought because of the same thing. I extracted the cab file itself just to see what it was and it's just an archive of icons and things like that, so it's not even like I'm missing out on much :/ Any advice/tips on how to work around this error would be appreciated e.g. if it's possible to make the installer ignore digital signatures. Running Windows 7.

    Read the article

  • Problem adding public key for apt

    - by highBandWidth
    I was trying to get the official mongodb for Ubuntu, following the instructions at http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Ubuntu+and+Debian+packages After adding the deb http://downloads-distro.mongodb.org/repo/ubuntu-upstart dist 10gen line in my sources, I need to add the pgp key since synaptic says W: GPG error: http://downloads-distro.mongodb.org dist Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 9ECBEC467F0CEB10 Again following instructions, I did sudo apt-key adv --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv 7F0CEB10 this says Executing: gpg --ignore-time-conflict --no-options --no-default-keyring --secret-keyring /etc/apt/secring.gpg --trustdb-name /etc/apt/trustdb.gpg --keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg --primary-keyring /etc/apt/trusted.gpg --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv 7F0CEB10 gpg: requesting key 7F0CEB10 from hkp server keyserver.ubuntu.com ?: keyserver.ubuntu.com: Connection refused gpgkeys: HTTP fetch error 7: couldn't connect: Connection refused gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found. gpg: Total number processed: 0 Interestingly, I also get $ apt-key list gpg: fatal: /home/myname/.gnupg: directory does not exist! secmem usage: 0/0 bytes in 0/0 blocks of pool 0/32768 How can I get apt to use this source?

    Read the article

  • Duplicity Errno 2 - no such file or directory

    - by Luma
    Hello, I am trying to setup a script for backing up a linux box to a CIFS share. I manually mounted the CIFS share and created a few test folders - OK I then ran duplicity manually with a rather simple command to begin with to make sure things work and well Not OK on this one :) duplicity /root file:///cifsmountfolder/existingfolder/ results: No signatures found, switching to full backup. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 463, in <module> with_tempdir(main) File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 458, in with_tempdir fn() File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 449, in main full_backup(col_stats) File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 155, in full_backup bytes_written = write_multivol("full", tarblock_iter, globals.backend) File "/usr/bin/duplicity", line 99, in write_multivol backend.put(tdp, dest_filename) File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/duplicity/backends.py", line 279, in put target_path.writefileobj(source_path.open("rb")) File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/duplicity/path.py", line 500, in writefileobj fout = self.open("wb") File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/duplicity/path.py", line 448, in open else: result = open(self.name, mode) IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/cifsmountfolder/existingfolder/duplicity-full.2010-09-18T18:41:43-07:00.vol1.difftar.gpg' any ideas? Thank you. Luc

    Read the article

  • Can Microsoft Security Essentials Signature Update Notifications be Avoided?

    - by Goto10
    I have my Windows Automatic Updates set to "Notify me but don't automatically download or install them.". However, if I install Microsoft Security Essentials, can I have the daily virus signatures downloaded and applied without being prompted each time by Windows Update? I like to have the control of installing general Windows Updates, but prefer not to have to accept the signature definitions that I expect to have applied every day (would get a bit tedious). Using XP Home SP 3. Just wanted to check this over before deciding whether or not to go for Microsoft Security Essentials.

    Read the article

  • Post-compromise security scan; anything else?

    - by IVR Avenger
    Hi, all. My girlfriend checked her Gmail yesterday morning, and then found, later on in the day, that it would no longer accept her password. She also found that this happened to her Hotmail and Yahoo! accounts. She's only checked these accounts from her work and home PC, and I've spent the day checking the home PC for problems. A full AVG scan revealed a couple of installers for her webcam software that had questionable security signatures, and a full Windows Defender scan brought back nothing. Assuming that her home PC was compromised, somehow, is there anything else I should use to check it for some sort of lingering malicious app before I tell her it's okay to login to her accounts, again? Furthermore, she's going through the GMail "account recovery" process as the account appears to have been disabled. Does anyone know if this actually works? Thanks so much. IVR Avenger

    Read the article

  • Getting error while running apt-get update

    - by pradeepchhetri
    I am getting the following error while running apt-get update on all of the servers. W: A error occurred during the signature verification. The repository is not updated and the previous index files will be used. Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 8B48AA6247928553 W: Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old ones used instead. The solutions available are: To login into each of the server and run the following command to import the gpg key for that repo. sudo gpg --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 8B48AA6247928553 sudo gpg --export --armor 8B48AA6247928553 | sudo apt-key add - But this requires logging into all of the individual servers and run the above two commands. I am looking for a way to correct by working on apt-repo server. Is there any way to do that.

    Read the article

  • openssl creates invalid signature if run by a different user

    - by divB
    Very strange problem here: openssl successfully creates signatures but only those created as root are valid whereas created by another user (www-data) are invalid! All files are readable and there are not error messages: # echo -ne Test | openssl dgst -ecdsa-with-SHA1 -sign activation.key > /tmp/asRoot.der # su www-data $ echo -ne Test | openssl dgst -ecdsa-with-SHA1 -sign activation.key > /tmp/asWww-data.der $ uname -a Linux linux 2.6.32-5-openvz-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Feb 25 01:16:25 UTC 2013 i686 GNU/Linux $ cat /etc/debian_version 6.0.7 Both files (asRoot.der and asWww-data.der) are transfered to a different computer for verification with the public key: $ echo -ne Test | openssl dgst -verify activation.pub -keyform DER -signature asRoot.der Verified OK $ echo -ne Test | openssl dgst -verify activation.pub -keyform DER -signature asWww-data.der Verification Failure That can't be true! What's wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Overriding RPM public key database

    - by pilcrow
    Can rpm be persuaded to import and fetch public keys from an arbitrary pubkey database? On the same build machine I've got two automated users who each need to verify package signatures from different sources, signed under different keys. If I rpm --import pkg-source1.pub pkg-source2.pub, each user will be able to verify packages intended for the other. I'd rather each user not know about the other's public keyring. Is there a way I can specify an alternate or supplementary pubkey database on a per-user or per-rpm(8)-invocation basis?

    Read the article

  • strategy /insights for avoiding document content loss due to encryption

    - by pbernatchez
    I'm about to encourage a group of people to begin using S-Mime and GPG for digital signatures and encryption. I foresee a nightmare of encrypted documents which can no longer be recovered because of lost keys. The thorniest issue is archiving. The natural way to preserve privacy in an archive is to archive the encrypted document. But that opens us up to the risk of a lost key when time comes to unarchive a document, or a forgotten password. After all it will be a long way in the future. This would be equivalent to having destroyed the document. First thought is archiving keys with documents, but that still leaves the forgotten pass phrase. Archiving the passphrase too would be tantamount to archiving in the clear. No privacy. What approaches do you use? What insights can you offer on the issue?

    Read the article

  • Alternative to Canned Response in Gmail

    - by Stuck
    I have a mailbox that i share with a colleague. We want a good way to store templates for e-mails that we send often like answers to common questions and so on. We have tried to use Canned Response to store this templates but that GUI really sucks and is kind of unusable for other things then signatures and stuff. Is anyone aware of a good alternative to this? We need to be able to share this templates. So it must be stored "in the cloud". We want "as easy access" as possible directly in gmail. A firefox plugin would be fine since we both use Firefox. We use both Mac and PC so the solution must be cross-platform. Anyone have any ideas on how to solve this?

    Read the article

  • Cannot assign multi-line values to CustomAttributes with Set-Mailbox

    - by Biglig
    A colleague is implementing an application that generates signatures and publishes them to Outlook. It would be useful to him if I could store a multi-line string for each user in Active-Directory. Using one of the Custom-Attributes seems obvious, but if I try set-mailbox biglig -CustomAtribute1 "First Line``r``n Second Line" then CustomAttribute1 gets set to "FirstLineSecondLine" and looses the breaks. However, the same syntax works fine when I set e.g. StreetAddress or Notes. Of course, those are changed with set-user rather than set-mailbox. According to Technet's reference for set-user and set-mailbox, The CustomAttributes, StreetAddress, and Notes all take a system.string as their value. Is it just the case that some attributes accept multi-line strings and some don't? If so, can anyone suggest a workaround?

    Read the article

  • What is Polymorphism?

    - by SAMIR BHOGAYTA
    * Polymorphism is one of the primary characteristics (concept) of object-oriented programming. * Poly means many and morph means form. Thus, polymorphism refers to being able to use many forms of a type without regard to the details. * Polymorphism is the characteristic of being able to assign a different meaning specifically, to allow an entity such as a variable, a function, or an object to have more than one form. * Polymorphism is the ability to process objects differently depending on their data types. * Polymorphism is the ability to redefine methods for derived classes. Types of Polymorphism * Compile time Polymorphism * Run time Polymorphism Compile time Polymorphism * Compile time Polymorphism also known as method overloading * Method overloading means having two or more methods with the same name but with different signatures Example of Compile time polymorphism public class Calculations { public int add(int x, int y) { return x+y; } public int add(int x, int y, int z) { return x+y+z; } } Run time Polymorphism * Run time Polymorphism also known as method overriding * Method overriding means having two or more methods with the same name , same signature but with different implementation Example of Run time Polymorphism class Circle { public int radius = 0; public double getArea() { return 3.14 * radius * radius } } class Sphere { public double getArea() { return 4 * 3.14 * radius * radius } }

    Read the article

  • Overriding GetHashCode in a mutable struct - What NOT to do?

    - by Kyle Baran
    I am using the XNA Framework to make a learning project. It has a Point struct which exposes an X and Y value; for the purpose of optimization, it breaks the rules for proper struct design, since its a mutable struct. As Marc Gravell, John Skeet, and Eric Lippert point out in their respective posts about GetHashCode() (which Point overrides), this is a rather bad thing, since if an object's values change while its contained in a hashmap (ie, LINQ queries), it can become "lost". However, I am making my own Point3D struct, following the design of Point as a guideline. Thus, it too is a mutable struct which overrides GetHashCode(). The only difference is that mine exposes and int for X, Y, and Z values, but is fundamentally the same. The signatures are below: public struct Point3D : IEquatable<Point3D> { public int X; public int Y; public int Z; public static bool operator !=(Point3D a, Point3D b) { } public static bool operator ==(Point3D a, Point3D b) { } public Point3D Zero { get; } public override int GetHashCode() { } public override bool Equals(object obj) { } public bool Equals(Point3D other) { } public override string ToString() { } } I have tried to break my struct in the way they describe, namely by storing it in a List<Point3D>, as well as changing the value via a method using ref, but I did not encounter they behavior they warn about (maybe a pointer might allow me to break it?). Am I being too cautious in my approach, or should I be okay to use it as is?

    Read the article

  • Why does integrity check fail for the 12.04.1 Alternate ISO?

    - by mghg
    I have followed various recommendations from the Ubuntu Documentation to create a bootable Ubuntu USB flash drive using the 12.04.1 Alternate install ISO-file for 64-bit PC. But the integrity test of the USB stick has failed and I do not see why. These are the steps I have made: Download of the 12.04.1 Alternate install ISO-file for 64-bit PC (ubuntu-12.04.1-alternate-amd64.iso) from http://releases.ubuntu.com/12.04.1/, as well as the MD5, SHA-1 and SHA-256 hash files and related PGP signatures Verification of the data integrity of the ISO-file using the MD5, SHA-1 and SHA-256 hash files, after having verified the hash files using the related PGP signature files (see e.g. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToSHA256SUM and https://help.ubuntu.com/community/VerifyIsoHowto) Creation of a bootable USB stick using Ubuntu's Startup Disk Creator program (see http://www.ubuntu.com/download/help/create-a-usb-stick-on-ubuntu) Boot of my computer using the newly made 12.04.1 Alternate install on USB stick Selection of the option "Check disc for defects" (see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/CDIntegrityCheck) Steps 1, 2, 3 and 4 went without any problem or error messages. However, step 5 ended with an error message entitled "Integrity test failed" and with the following content: The ./install/netboot/ubuntu-installer/amd64/pxelinux.cfg/default file failed the MD5 checksum verification. Your CD-ROM or this file may have been corrupted. I have experienced the same (might only be similar since I have no exact notes) error message in previous attempts using the 12.04 (i.e. not the maintenance release) Alternate install ISO-file. I have in these cases tried to install anyway and have so far not experienced any problems to my knowledge. Is failed integrity check described above a serious error? What is the solution? Or can it be ignored without further problems?

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Predicate, Comparison, and Converter Generic Delegates

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again, in this series of posts I look at the parts of the .NET Framework that may seem trivial, but can help improve your code by making it easier to write and maintain. The index of all my past little wonders posts can be found here. In the last three weeks, we examined the Action family of delegates (and delegates in general), the Func family of delegates, and the EventHandler family of delegates and how they can be used to support generic, reusable algorithms and classes. This week I will be completing my series on the generic delegates in the .NET Framework with a discussion of three more, somewhat less used, generic delegates: Predicate<T>, Comparison<T>, and Converter<TInput, TOutput>. These are older generic delegates that were introduced in .NET 2.0, mostly for use in the Array and List<T> classes.  Though older, it’s good to have an understanding of them and their intended purpose.  In addition, you can feel free to use them yourself, though obviously you can also use the equivalents from the Func family of delegates instead. Predicate<T> – delegate for determining matches The Predicate<T> delegate was a very early delegate developed in the .NET 2.0 Framework to determine if an item was a match for some condition in a List<T> or T[].  The methods that tend to use the Predicate<T> include: Find(), FindAll(), FindLast() Uses the Predicate<T> delegate to finds items, in a list/array of type T, that matches the given predicate. FindIndex(), FindLastIndex() Uses the Predicate<T> delegate to find the index of an item, of in a list/array of type T, that matches the given predicate. The signature of the Predicate<T> delegate (ignoring variance for the moment) is: 1: public delegate bool Predicate<T>(T obj); So, this is a delegate type that supports any method taking an item of type T and returning bool.  In addition, there is a semantic understanding that this predicate is supposed to be examining the item supplied to see if it matches a given criteria. 1: // finds first even number (2) 2: var firstEven = Array.Find(numbers, n => (n % 2) == 0); 3:  4: // finds all odd numbers (1, 3, 5, 7, 9) 5: var allEvens = Array.FindAll(numbers, n => (n % 2) == 1); 6:  7: // find index of first multiple of 5 (4) 8: var firstFiveMultiplePos = Array.FindIndex(numbers, n => (n % 5) == 0); This delegate has typically been succeeded in LINQ by the more general Func family, so that Predicate<T> and Func<T, bool> are logically identical.  Strictly speaking, though, they are different types, so a delegate reference of type Predicate<T> cannot be directly assigned to a delegate reference of type Func<T, bool>, though the same method can be assigned to both. 1: // SUCCESS: the same lambda can be assigned to either 2: Predicate<DateTime> isSameDayPred = dt => dt.Date == DateTime.Today; 3: Func<DateTime, bool> isSameDayFunc = dt => dt.Date == DateTime.Today; 4:  5: // ERROR: once they are assigned to a delegate type, they are strongly 6: // typed and cannot be directly assigned to other delegate types. 7: isSameDayPred = isSameDayFunc; When you assign a method to a delegate, all that is required is that the signature matches.  This is why the same method can be assigned to either delegate type since their signatures are the same.  However, once the method has been assigned to a delegate type, it is now a strongly-typed reference to that delegate type, and it cannot be assigned to a different delegate type (beyond the bounds of variance depending on Framework version, of course). Comparison<T> – delegate for determining order Just as the Predicate<T> generic delegate was birthed to give Array and List<T> the ability to perform type-safe matching, the Comparison<T> was birthed to give them the ability to perform type-safe ordering. The Comparison<T> is used in Array and List<T> for: Sort() A form of the Sort() method that takes a comparison delegate; this is an alternate way to custom sort a list/array from having to define custom IComparer<T> classes. The signature for the Comparison<T> delegate looks like (without variance): 1: public delegate int Comparison<T>(T lhs, T rhs); The goal of this delegate is to compare the left-hand-side to the right-hand-side and return a negative number if the lhs < rhs, zero if they are equal, and a positive number if the lhs > rhs.  Generally speaking, null is considered to be the smallest value of any reference type, so null should always be less than non-null, and two null values should be considered equal. In most sort/ordering methods, you must specify an IComparer<T> if you want to do custom sorting/ordering.  The Array and List<T> types, however, also allow for an alternative Comparison<T> delegate to be used instead, essentially, this lets you perform the custom sort without having to have the custom IComparer<T> class defined. It should be noted, however, that the LINQ OrderBy(), and ThenBy() family of methods do not support the Comparison<T> delegate (though one could easily add their own extension methods to create one, or create an IComparer() factory class that generates one from a Comparison<T>). So, given this delegate, we could use it to perform easy sorts on an Array or List<T> based on custom fields.  Say for example we have a data class called Employee with some basic employee information: 1: public sealed class Employee 2: { 3: public string Name { get; set; } 4: public int Id { get; set; } 5: public double Salary { get; set; } 6: } And say we had a List<Employee> that contained data, such as: 1: var employees = new List<Employee> 2: { 3: new Employee { Name = "John Smith", Id = 2, Salary = 37000.0 }, 4: new Employee { Name = "Jane Doe", Id = 1, Salary = 57000.0 }, 5: new Employee { Name = "John Doe", Id = 5, Salary = 60000.0 }, 6: new Employee { Name = "Jane Smith", Id = 3, Salary = 59000.0 } 7: }; Now, using the Comparison<T> delegate form of Sort() on the List<Employee>, we can sort our list many ways: 1: // sort based on employee ID 2: employees.Sort((lhs, rhs) => Comparer<int>.Default.Compare(lhs.Id, rhs.Id)); 3:  4: // sort based on employee name 5: employees.Sort((lhs, rhs) => string.Compare(lhs.Name, rhs.Name)); 6:  7: // sort based on salary, descending (note switched lhs/rhs order for descending) 8: employees.Sort((lhs, rhs) => Comparer<double>.Default.Compare(rhs.Salary, lhs.Salary)); So again, you could use this older delegate, which has a lot of logical meaning to it’s name, or use a generic delegate such as Func<T, T, int> to implement the same sort of behavior.  All this said, one of the reasons, in my opinion, that Comparison<T> isn’t used too often is that it tends to need complex lambdas, and the LINQ ability to order based on projections is much easier to use, though the Array and List<T> sorts tend to be more efficient if you want to perform in-place ordering. Converter<TInput, TOutput> – delegate to convert elements The Converter<TInput, TOutput> delegate is used by the Array and List<T> delegate to specify how to convert elements from an array/list of one type (TInput) to another type (TOutput).  It is used in an array/list for: ConvertAll() Converts all elements from a List<TInput> / TInput[] to a new List<TOutput> / TOutput[]. The delegate signature for Converter<TInput, TOutput> is very straightforward (ignoring variance): 1: public delegate TOutput Converter<TInput, TOutput>(TInput input); So, this delegate’s job is to taken an input item (of type TInput) and convert it to a return result (of type TOutput).  Again, this is logically equivalent to a newer Func delegate with a signature of Func<TInput, TOutput>.  In fact, the latter is how the LINQ conversion methods are defined. So, we could use the ConvertAll() syntax to convert a List<T> or T[] to different types, such as: 1: // get a list of just employee IDs 2: var empIds = employees.ConvertAll(emp => emp.Id); 3:  4: // get a list of all emp salaries, as int instead of double: 5: var empSalaries = employees.ConvertAll(emp => (int)emp.Salary); Note that the expressions above are logically equivalent to using LINQ’s Select() method, which gives you a lot more power: 1: // get a list of just employee IDs 2: var empIds = employees.Select(emp => emp.Id).ToList(); 3:  4: // get a list of all emp salaries, as int instead of double: 5: var empSalaries = employees.Select(emp => (int)emp.Salary).ToList(); The only difference with using LINQ is that many of the methods (including Select()) are deferred execution, which means that often times they will not perform the conversion for an item until it is requested.  This has both pros and cons in that you gain the benefit of not performing work until it is actually needed, but on the flip side if you want the results now, there is overhead in the behind-the-scenes work that support deferred execution (it’s supported by the yield return / yield break keywords in C# which define iterators that maintain current state information). In general, the new LINQ syntax is preferred, but the older Array and List<T> ConvertAll() methods are still around, as is the Converter<TInput, TOutput> delegate. Sidebar: Variance support update in .NET 4.0 Just like our descriptions of Func and Action, these three early generic delegates also support more variance in assignment as of .NET 4.0.  Their new signatures are: 1: // comparison is contravariant on type being compared 2: public delegate int Comparison<in T>(T lhs, T rhs); 3:  4: // converter is contravariant on input and covariant on output 5: public delegate TOutput Contravariant<in TInput, out TOutput>(TInput input); 6:  7: // predicate is contravariant on input 8: public delegate bool Predicate<in T>(T obj); Thus these delegates can now be assigned to delegates allowing for contravariance (going to a more derived type) or covariance (going to a less derived type) based on whether the parameters are input or output, respectively. Summary Today, we wrapped up our generic delegates discussion by looking at three lesser-used delegates: Predicate<T>, Comparison<T>, and Converter<TInput, TOutput>.  All three of these tend to be replaced by their more generic Func equivalents in LINQ, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t understand what they do or can’t use them for your own code, as they do contain semantic meanings in their names that sometimes get lost in the more generic Func name.   Tweet Technorati Tags: C#,CSharp,.NET,Little Wonders,delegates,generics,Predicate,Converter,Comparison

    Read the article

  • The Red Gate and .NET Reflector Debacle

    - by Rick Strahl
    About a month ago Red Gate – the company who owns the NET Reflector tool most .NET devs use at one point or another – decided to change their business model for Reflector and take the product from free to a fully paid for license model. As a bit of history: .NET Reflector was originally created by Lutz Roeder as a free community tool to inspect .NET assemblies. Using Reflector you can examine the types in an assembly, drill into type signatures and quickly disassemble code to see how a particular method works.  In case you’ve been living under a rock and you’ve never looked at Reflector, here’s what it looks like drilled into an assembly from disk with some disassembled source code showing: Note that you get tons of information about each element in the tree, and almost all related types and members are clickable both in the list and source view so it’s extremely easy to navigate and follow the code flow even in this static assembly only view. For many year’s Lutz kept the the tool up to date and added more features gradually improving an already amazing tool and making it better. Then about two and a half years ago Red Gate bought the tool from Lutz. A lot of ruckus and noise ensued in the community back then about what would happen with the tool and… for the most part very little did. Other than the incessant update notices with prominent Red Gate promo on them life with Reflector went on. The product didn’t die and and it didn’t go commercial or to a charge model. When .NET 4.0 came out it still continued to work mostly because the .NET feature set doesn’t drastically change how types behave.  Then a month back Red Gate started making noise about a new Version Version 7 which would be commercial. No more free version - and a shit storm broke out in the community. Now normally I’m not one to be critical of companies trying to make money from a product, much less for a product that’s as incredibly useful as Reflector. There isn’t day in .NET development that goes by for me where I don’t fire up Reflector. Whether it’s for examining the innards of the .NET Framework, checking out third party code, or verifying some of my own code and resources. Even more so recently I’ve been doing a lot of Interop work with a non-.NET application that needs to access .NET components and Reflector has been immensely valuable to me (and my clients) if figuring out exact type signatures required to calling .NET components in assemblies. In short Reflector is an invaluable tool to me. Ok, so what’s the problem? Why all the fuss? Certainly the $39 Red Gate is trying to charge isn’t going to kill any developer. If there’s any tool in .NET that’s worth $39 it’s Reflector, right? Right, but that’s not the problem here. The problem is how Red Gate went about moving the product to commercial which borders on the downright bizarre. It’s almost as if somebody in management wrote a slogan: “How can we piss off the .NET community in the most painful way we can?” And that it seems Red Gate has a utterly succeeded. People are rabid, and for once I think that this outrage isn’t exactly misplaced. Take a look at the message thread that Red Gate dedicated from a link off the download page. Not only is Version 7 going to be a paid commercial tool, but the older versions of Reflector won’t be available any longer. Not only that but older versions that are already in use also will continually try to update themselves to the new paid version – which when installed will then expire unless registered properly. There have also been reports of Version 6 installs shutting themselves down and failing to work if the update is refused (I haven’t seen that myself so not sure if that’s true). In other words Red Gate is trying to make damn sure they’re getting your money if you attempt to use Reflector. There’s a lot of temptation there. Think about the millions of .NET developers out there and all of them possibly upgrading – that’s a nice chunk of change that Red Gate’s sitting on. Even with all the community backlash these guys are probably making some bank right now just because people need to get life to move on. Red Gate also put up a Feedback link on the download page – which not surprisingly is chock full with hate mail condemning the move. Oddly there’s not a single response to any of those messages by the Red Gate folks except when it concerns license questions for the full version. It puzzles me what that link serves for other yet than another complete example of failure to understand how to handle customer relations. There’s no doubt that that all of this has caused some serious outrage in the community. The sad part though is that this could have been handled so much less arrogantly and without pissing off the entire community and causing so much ill-will. People are pissed off and I have no doubt that this negative publicity will show up in the sales numbers for their other products. I certainly hope so. Stupidity ought to be painful! Why do Companies do boneheaded stuff like this? Red Gate’s original decision to buy Reflector was hotly debated but at that the time most of what would happen was mostly speculation. But I thought it was a smart move for any company that is in need of spreading its marketing message and corporate image as a vendor in the .NET space. Where else do you get to flash your corporate logo to hordes of .NET developers on a regular basis?  Exploiting that marketing with some goodwill of providing a free tool breeds positive feedback that hopefully has a good effect on the company’s visibility and the products it sells. Instead Red Gate seems to have taken exactly the opposite tack of corporate bullying to try to make a quick buck – and in the process ruined any community goodwill that might have come from providing a service community for free while still getting valuable marketing. What’s so puzzling about this boneheaded escapade is that the company doesn’t need to resort to underhanded tactics like what they are trying with Reflector 7. The tools the company makes are very good. I personally use SQL Compare, Sql Data Compare and ANTS Profiler on a regular basis and all of these tools are essential in my toolbox. They certainly work much better than the tools that are in the box with Visual Studio. Chances are that if Reflector 7 added useful features I would have been more than happy to shell out my $39 to upgrade when the time is right. It’s Expensive to give away stuff for Free At the same time, this episode shows some of the big problems that come with ‘free’ tools. A lot of organizations are realizing that giving stuff away for free is actually quite expensive and the pay back is often very intangible if any at all. Those that rely on donations or other voluntary compensation find that they amount contributed is absolutely miniscule as to not matter at all. Yet at the same time I bet most of those clamouring the loudest on that Red Gate Reflector feedback page that Reflector won’t be free anymore probably have NEVER made a donation to any open source project or free tool ever. The expectation of Free these days is just too great – which is a shame I think. There’s a lot to be said for paid software and having somebody to hold to responsible to because you gave them some money. There’s an incentive –> payback –> responsibility model that seems to be missing from free software (not all of it, but a lot of it). While there certainly are plenty of bad apples in paid software as well, money tends to be a good motivator for people to continue working and improving products. Reasons for giving away stuff are many but often it’s a naïve desire to share things when things are simple. At first it might be no problem to volunteer time and effort but as products mature the fun goes out of it, and as the reality of product maintenance kicks in developers want to get something back for the time and effort they’re putting in doing non-glamorous work. It’s then when products die or languish and this is painful for all to watch. For Red Gate however, I think there was always a pretty good payback from the Reflector acquisition in terms of marketing: Visibility and possible positioning of their products although they seemed to have mostly ignored that option. On the other hand they started this off pretty badly even 2 and a half years back when they aquired Reflector from Lutz with the same arrogant attitude that is evident in the latest episode. You really gotta wonder what folks are thinking in management – the sad part is from advance emails that were circulating, they were fully aware of the shit storm they were inciting with this and I suspect they are banking on the sheer numbers of .NET developers to still make them a tidy chunk of change from upgrades… Alternatives are coming For me personally the single license isn’t a problem, but I actually have a tool that I sell (an interop Web Service proxy generation tool) to customers and one of the things I recommend to use with has been Reflector to view assembly information and to find which Interop classes to instantiate from the non-.NET environment. It’s been nice to use Reflector for this with its small footprint and zero-configuration installation. But now with V7 becoming a paid tool that option is not going to be available anymore. Luckily it looks like the .NET community is jumping to it and trying to fill the void. Amidst the Red Gate outrage a new library called ILSpy has sprung up and providing at least some of the core functionality of Reflector with an open source library. It looks promising going forward and I suspect there will be a lot more support and interest to support this project now that Reflector has gone over to the ‘dark side’…© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011

    Read the article

  • WinQual: Why would WER not accept code-signing certificates?

    - by Ian Boyd
    In 2005 i tried to establish a WinQual account with Microsoft, so i could pick up our (if any) crash dump files submitted automatically through Windows Error Reporting (WER). i was not allowed to have my crash dumps, because i don't have a Verisign certificate. Instead i have a cheaper one, generated by a Verisign subsidiary: Thawte. The method in which you join is: you digitally sign a sample exe they provide. This proves that you are the same signer that signed apps that they got crash dumps from in the wild. Cryptographically, the private key is needed to generate a digital signature on an executable. Only the holder of that private key can create a signature with for the matching public key. It doesn't matter who generated that private key. That includes certificates that are generated from: self-signing Wells Fargo DigiCert SecureTrust Trustware QuoVadis GoDaddy Entrust Cybertrust GeoTrust GlobalSign Comodo Thawte Verisign Yet Microsof's WinQual only accepts digital certificates generated by Verisign. Not even Verisign's subsidiaries are good enough (Thawte). Can anyone think of any technical, legal or ethical reason why Microsoft doesn't want to accept code-signing certificates? The WinQual site says: Why Is a Digital Certificate Required for Winqual Membership? A digital certificate helps protect your company from individuals who seek to impersonate members of your staff or who would otherwise commit acts of fraud against your company. Using a digital certificate enables proof of an identity for a user or an organization. Is somehow a Thawte digital certificate not secure? Two years later, i sent a reminder notice to WinQual that i've been waiting to be able to get at my crash dumps. The response from WinQual team was: Hello, Thanks for the reminder. We have notified the appropriate people that this is still a request. In 2008 i asked this question in a Microsoft support forum, and the response was: We are only setup to accept VeriSign Certificates at this point. We have not had an overwhelming demand to support other types of certificates. What can it possibly mean to not be "setup" to accept other kinds of certificates? If the thumbprint of the key that signed the WinQual.exe test app is the same as the thumbprint that signed the executable who's crash dump you got in the wild: it is proven - they are my crash dumps, give them to me. And it's not like there's a special API to check if a Verisign digital signature is valid, as opposed to all other digital signatures. A valid signature is valid no matter who generated the key. Microsoft is free to not trust the signer, but that's not the same as identity. So that is my question, can anyone think of any practical reason why WinQual isn't setup to support digital signatures? One person theorized that the answer is that they're just lazy: Not that I know but I would assume that the team running the winQual system is a live team and not a dev team - as in, personality and skillset geared towards maintenance of existing systems. I could be wrong though. They don't want to do work to change it. But can anyone think of anything that would need to be changed? It's the same logic no matter what generated the key: "does the thumbprint match". What am i missing?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >